I have played many parties with a mage, mostly dual classed mages.

In all the time I have played this game I never played a sorcerer, But just recently I decided to try it out.

I was under the impression that a sorcerer got to cast as many spells as he could memorize, for as many times as his level allowed.

I found out that a sorcerer can only cast a set number of times from a certain spell LEVEL! I thought if he had 6 magic missles and 6 chromatic orbs he could cast a total of 12 spells, when in reality he can only cast 6 of either or both combined.

How is this any better then a mage? A mage can only cast a set number of times from a spell level as well. If you want to use 6 magic missles, you memorize 6 magic missles, or if you want to cast 3 magic missles and 3 orbs you memorize 3 magic missles and 3 orbs. Its no different then a sorcerer casting 3 orbs and 3 missles, he has the same limitations.

The only difference I see is the sorcerer gets a few more spell castings at the higher levels.

But then there are the many sorcerer downsides, no dual classing, and of course limited spells.

I guess you could make a case for the sorcerer being a lot more flexible in realtime, since he can choose from any spell in his spellbook. But usually I already know what spells I will be using the most and just memorize a set selection.

Still, I don't see how they are more powerfull then mages, and they fall far behind a dual classed mage.

Well, i´ll just be adding this one point for the sorcerer:

If you skip the mages and only get a sorcerer (or more from a mod), you´ll be reaping up more than a ton of profits as a scroll salesman. ^^

The difference being that, for the mage, the number is less.

You'd be surprised at the difference another 3 time stops makes... ;)

In addition to more spell castings, the sorcerer has more freedom. Instead of memorizing, say, one Invisibility spell just in case, you have it there if you need it. Instead of clearing your level-1 spell list every time you need to Identify a bunch of items, you can just identify them. I find that I only memorize two or three different spells per level anyway, so why not just pick the spells I know I'm going to cast and get them whenever I want?

And just how many different spells do your Mages cast? Usually, there are a maximum of 5 or so (probably even less) spells that are consistently memorized on a daily basis. In those cases, a Sorcerer's limitation isn't that great. In the situations where an unusual spell is needed (ie: Familiar, Protection from Fire), then a scroll will usually work fine.

there are so many spells that you have in your spell book that you rarely use, like Illumina said. And Assassin is also right in saying that you could always use scrolls if you need them.

But a sorceror is no joke. Imagine having 6 ADHW at your disposal if you ever needed it. Solo a mage and then solo a sorc...you will notice a huge difference.

Also, sorcerors are godly for Spell Sequencer/Trigger potential.

But, take another mage with you, to get the support spells you'll be wanting.

I'm likely just tired/stupid right now, but what is ADHW?

Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting.


Sillara

Ah-hh... right. Thanks! [img]smile.gif[/img]

You're right. Shortly after the hells freeze over, for example, you might want to cast Infravision.

Well, I didn't take Breach with my sorceror, but then again with two other casters (Bard and Swashbuckler->Mage) I didn't need to [img]tongue.gif[/img]

That's what I was kinda referring to, let your sorceror play with most of the destructive magic (and a few buffs), then let your other mage play with the other stuff.

Also, given that as has been said it is perfectly possible to build a sorc and not need any more spells, they are also much more flexible within the spells selected. E.G. you can blast away with AOE spells until they get close, the hammer them with individual spells when they close with you fighters. A mage wouldn't have the same flexibility, as he may run out of AOE spells, much more likely than with a sorc, or on the other hand have a shortage in other spells areas.

But if you knew ahead of time how you planned to fight the battle that wouldn't matter, the mage could memorize exactly the spells she needs. (kind of unrealistic, but....). However, the fact that each of your images or simulacrums has access to the entire spell book, and not just the spells you have memorized at that time is a huge advantage for the sorceror, even if you know exactly which spells you will want to cast.

Oh, here´s one!

When a sorcerer get´s restored after level draination ( [img]tongue.gif[/img] ), you WON´T have to rewrite his entire spellbook! :D

I'd agree with all the plus points raised above, but I wonder if the greatest advantage to a sorcerer is that you tend to play them with a little more abandon then you do mages.

A typical example with a mage is where you have used up one slot on 'haste'. You then come up to a big battle, and you find yourself asking questions like, 'Should I use my one and only haste here, or should I see how I go and save it until later, when I might need it more?"

I find that when my party needs to rest due to being out of healing spells, the mages have only used a fraction of their offensive spells. With a sorcerer, knowing that I can cast the same spell again, if needed, I'm so much more willing to lob them out.

My sorcerers will frequently get down to having absolutely no spells at all left, which means that they are contributing their full potential to the party. This has never happened to me with a mage, although, having soloed a sorcerer to the point of boredom, I now play mages better, having learnt the one great truth that sorcerers can teach - spells are useless unless you cast them.

Dundee makes a strong point, and Andraste, well... Check the Classic threads to find out what happened there. But I find that I can waltz through the game with a solo sorcerer without taking Project Image or Animate Dead. I'd just exhaust my spells... and once you get Wish, well, you'll never rest again.

Use spell trap from the Staff of the Magi before casting project image and you can give yourself an infinite amount of spells (very cheesey method) by having your image cast high level spells on you.

Or memorize images on that spell level and let your images do all the casting. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Especially potent if you also have the Simulacrum spell, an image can cast that [img]tongue.gif[/img]

SPOILER

Level drain a simulacrum, then restore it. It will be the same level the host [img]tongue.gif[/img] Works great with Vhailors Helm.

Use spell trap from the Staff of the Magi before casting project image and you can give yourself an infinite amount of spells (very cheesey method) by having your image cast high level spells on you. </font>[/QUOTE]You are comparing a butterknife to a chainsaw.

Yes, they both can cut stuff, but the chainsaw is superior.

Not to mention that the setup time needed for the SotM Exploit is a bane when compared to the Sorcerer's PI Exploit( also infinite spells by the way). Also, when the Sorcerer gains access to a certain Lvl-9 ToB spell, it blows the Mage away in terms of damage output.

PS: The SotM Exploit is only 'infinite' if you have access to the same Lvl-9 ToB spell. Mages are better off using the actual Spell Trap Exploit to gain infinite spells.

The Mage's lack of Lvl-9/10 spell slots also affects them greatly. This is probably one of their biggest achilles' heel when compared to the Sorcerer.

Just to add, I think someone pointed out a little while ago that a sorcerer can be just as powerful as another in terms of magic capabilities, even with minimum stats. A mage however, needs high Intelligence. Only useful to anyone who ever wanted to play a party with all minimum stats, and if they chose to do that the sorcerer would also have a nice charisma of 9.
-Brainless One

Baldur's Gate ignores many of the rules of canon D&D....including how a Mage's casting ability is determined by his Intelligence, and a Sorcerer's by his Charisma. The two stats have almost no effect in this game.

I think Intelligence matters as to how many spells of each level a mage can have in his spellbook. Is that really all it does? (Besides obvious things like lore?)
-Brainless One

It also affects probability of scribing a scroll into your spell book.

Brainless One is correct for mages. However, casting level based on intelligence isn't there. Neither is charisma having any effect on sorcerors.

No, actually Brainless One is not correct. Intelligence affects nothing except the odds of <u>scribing</u> new scrolls into your spellbook (for Mages and Bards), and of course Lore, surviving Mind Flayer hits, and the presence of certain conversation options (for everybody).

no. six is not correct.
intelligence also affects the number of spells per level you can scribe.

But otherwise, six IS correct.

In 3rd Ed. your INT score -10 is the maximum level spell you can cast. i.e an INT score of 15 will allow you to cast up to level 15 spells. having said that though, i believe that the same is true of sorcerers, only using CHA instead of INT. Could be wrong, never played a sorc very far in 3 Ed.

ZFR just so I can understand exactly where you're info comes from, did you arrive at your conclusion through the manual/ PNP rule set, or through your actual experiences with the game?

actual in game experience.

But its in the manual too.

http://zfr77.bravehost.com/temp/bgscreen.jpg

and am not using any mod other than baldurdash

EDIT:
clicking on link wont do. ;you have to copy paste it manually

[ 07-19-2005, 09:24 AM: Message edited by: ZFR ]

Ah, yes, technically that's true, but since there's no reason for any Mage* to try scribing spells with less than 24 INT, I feel this has little relevance. If you want to include it, however, that's fine.

<font size=1>*Except Wizard Slayer->Mages, but since they're guaranteed at least 17 INT, they won't see this rule much either.</font>

Sorry, Brainless One, I misread your post--I thought you said the # of spells per level that a Mage could cast was dependent on Intelligence. My bad.

[ 07-19-2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: SixOfSpades ]

I thought that the 2nd edition rules on maximum spell level are implemented for the PC. I've never played a mage with intelligence 17, but I was led to believe that such a mage would only have access to level 1-8 spells, not level 9 spells. I do know that the NPCs have access to all spell levels, regardless of intelligence.

Believe it or not Six, some of us do play mages without resorting to scribing cheese like potions of genius [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[off-topic]
ZFR...
What´s that rodent in the backpack i see behind the information screen?

O_O
[/off topic]

That could be a familiar.

Ahh, yes, of course...

Goblinz: Forehead slap attack

I don't regard buffing my Mages before scribing spells as cheesy, certainly not as cheesy as some things that your enemies do, like casting True Sight even though they're Conjurers. Considering that I never use Mislead, Project Image, or any spell-storage spells, and Simulacrum only very rarely, I think chugging a few Potions of Genius seems rather negligible.

Besides, I always use natural rolls for my characters, and it's tough enough getting good DEX and CON for everybody without making sure that all Mages roll their maximum in INT, as well.